Category Archives: Uncategorized

WA Court Dismisses Criminal Conviction Due To Overbroad Search Warrant

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Constitutional Rights, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Search and Seizure, Search Warrant, Sex Crimes, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Technology, Uncategorized, Washington Court of Appeals, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

EFF Tells the Second Circuit a Second Time That Electronic Device Searches at the Border Require a Warrant | Electronic Frontier Foundation

In State v. Hampton, the WA Court of Appeals held a Search Warrant was overbroad because it allows the seizure of evidence related to crimes for which there was no probable cause; in this case, sex crimes.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Law enforcement investigated Mr. Hampton for trafficking in stolen property and controlled substances. During the investigation, officers seized Hampton’s brown briefcase, which contained electronic storage devices. Thereafter, a search warrant authorized law enforcement to search the electronic storage devices and all contents that showed possession of trafficking in stolen property or drugs.

The search requested search and seizure for the following:

“Any data that may be kept on any of the seized digital devices in any format to include but not limited to intact files, deleted files, deleted file fragments or remnants related to the purchase, possession, receipt and distribution of controlled substances and or stolen property.”

When reviewing files from the storage device, law enforcement viewed ten-year-old videos of Hampton engaging in sexual intercourse with his girlfriend, while she was incapacitated. The superior court refused to suppress the videos. A jury convicted Hampton of numerous Sex Offenses. On appeal, Mr. Hampton argued the search warrant was invalid because of its overbreadth.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

In short, the Court of Appeals (COA) agreed with Mr. Hampton that the trial court should have granted his motion to suppress. First, the warrant authorized an overbroad and unfettered search of electronic storage devices found in the briefcase. Second, law enforcement exceeded the scope of the authorized search when viewing movie files stored on computer drives without regard to their date or connection to the crimes being investigated.

The COA emphasized that the Fourth Amendment demands in part that no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Furthermore, the latter part of this clause requires specificity in a search warrant.  Also, Article I, section 7 of the Washington State Constitution states, “No person shall be disturbed in their private affairs or have their home invaded without authority of law.”

The COA also analyzed that the particularity requirement of search warrants provides important protection against governmental invasion of privacy. This is because the demand renders general searches impossible and prevents the seizure of one thing under a warrant describing another. The particularity requirement also ensures judicial oversight of the scope of a law enforcement search such that the executing officer lacks unlimited discretion when executing the warrant. The warrant must be based on probable cause of criminal activity and must limit the scope of the search to the probable cause determination.

“Specificity consists of two components: particularity and breadth,” said the COA. “Particularity demands that the warrant clearly state what is sought. Breadth requires the scope of the warrant be limited by the probable cause on which the warrant is based.”

The COA reasoned that the search of Mr. Hampton’s electronic storage devices conducted by Detective Travis Frizzell verifies the impermissible breadth of the search warrant. The police’s search warrant affidavit established probable cause to believe Timothy Hampton and Robert Rogers engaged in a criminal conspiracy to purchase and sell narcotics in 2020, not almost a decade earlier.

“By viewing videos from 2013, Detective Frizzell stepped inside a time machine and outside the confines of probable cause. The State’s argument that the warrant sanctioned Frizzell’s view of the 2013 files defeats its defense of the constitutionality of the warrant. If we ruled that the search warrant limited the search to evidence of possessing stolen property or controlled substances and thereby upheld the validity of the warrant, we would need to rule that Detective Frizzell’s search exceeded the scope of the warrant.” ~WA Court of Appeals

The COA concluded that a court must suppress evidence seized due to an overly broad search warrant. It remanded Mr. Hampton’s case to the superior court for vacation of his convictions and for dismissal of the charges.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime involving search & seizure issues. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Nitazene: More Potent Than Fentanyl

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, felony, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Nitazene, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

New, Dangerous Synthetic Opioid in D.C., Emerging in Tri-State Area

Photo Courtesy of the DEA

Nitazenes, a class of synthetic opioids with no approved medical use, are emerging as a serious concern in the United States due to their extreme potency and association with overdose deaths.

WHAT ARE NITAZENES?

Nitazenes (benzimidazole-opioids) are a class of extremely potent novel synthetic opioids. First developed in the 1950s by researchers in Switzerland as an opioid analgesic alternative to morphine, nitazenes were never approved for medical use.

Beginning in 2019, nitazenes emerged more widely on the illicit drug market in Europe. Since then, nitazenes have been identified on nearly every continent, including North America, South America, Asia, and Oceania. Due to their recent emergence, comprehensive data on the spread of nitazenes are not available. Limited data described in this report suggest that nitazene use is a growing trend in North America and that availability is likely spreading across the Americas. As they have emerged across the globe, illicit manufacturers have continuously synthesized new and chemically distinct types of nitazenes. Today, at least 13 different types of nitazenes have been identified.

WHY AND HOW DO PEOPLE USE NITAZENES?

People may use nitazenes for the same reasons that they use other opioids. Nitazene use may be motivated by self-treatment for physical, mental, or emotional disorders. They are also used to experience opioid effects, such as feelings of euphoria, relaxation, sleepiness, and reduced pain. Nitazenes are frequently mixed with or counterfeited as other drugs (e.g., heroin, fentanyl, benzodiazepines, or other synthetic drugs) to increase potency and cut costs. Nitazenes are available in many forms, including pills, powders, and sprays – both in “pure” form and mixed with other drugs.

DANGERS OF NITAZENES

Nitazenes are highly addictive and continued use can lead to dependency. Although studies about nitazene dependence and withdrawal are limited, nitazene withdrawal has a high potential to be severe and painful. Nitazenes can also cause dizziness, nausea, vomiting, disorientation, loss of consciousness, and seizures.

Like other opioids, nitazenes present a high risk of central nervous system or respiratory depression, as well as cardiac arrest. Nitazenes present an especially high risk for overdose and overdose mortality, due to their high potency. Nitazene potency varies significantly, but all nitazenes are much more potent than natural (non-synthetic) opioids, such as morphine.

OVERDOSE STATISTICS

At least 2,000 deaths have been associated with nitazenes nationwide since 2019. For example, Tennessee saw a four-fold increase in nitazene-involved overdose deaths between 2020 and 2021.

NITAZENES IN THE AMERICAS

Regional trends in the opioid epidemic are often first identified in the United States and Canada, including the prior emergence of fentanyl and xylazine. Both countries are recognized as the global epicenters of the opioid epidemic and support robust substance use surveillance systems. Nitazenes were first identified in the street drug supplies of both countries in late 2019 and early 2020. Since then, other findings indicate that nitazene use is continuing to spread on the continent.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Drug Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

The “Ruse” Tactics of ICE May Violate Constitutional Rights

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Constitutional Rights, Fourth Amendment, Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE), Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Search and Seizure, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Who are these people?' Masked immigration agents challenge local police, sow fear in L.A. - Los Angeles Times

Photo Courtesy of Carlin Stiehl/Los Angeles Times

During the first 100 days of President Donald J. Trump’s second term, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has arrested and deported thousands of illegal aliens. The undocumented immigrants are broadly labelled as criminals who threaten public safety and national security.

Although some undocuments immigrants are criminals, many of them are not. They are  hardworking individuals simply going about their daily lives — working, commuting, and spending time at home with families.

Unfortunately, ICE has used racial profiling and intimidation tactics that instill fear and confusion in communities and stoke mistrust in the police. ICE deploys “ruse” tactics to gain warrantless entry into people’s homes or lure them out. Ruses are a tactic used frequently by ICE in investigating and arresting non-citizens. Since 2013, hundreds of reported raids include those involving ICE’s use of ruses.

WHAT IS AN “ICE RUSE?”

    • Impersonating local law enforcement: ICE agents frequently pose as local police officers, detectives, or probation officers to gain trust or induce individuals to open their doors or cooperate. They might wear plain clothes, wear uniforms labeled “POLICE,” or even vests that resemble local law enforcement uniforms, while concealing any ICE identification.
    • Fabricating investigations: Agents might claim to be investigating a fake crime or a fake crime suspect to identify and locate the targeted individual. They could show a picture of a “suspect” and use a name that matches someone in the household to trick residents into revealing information or letting them inside.
    • Misrepresenting purpose: Agents may request to “take a quick look around” or “come in to talk,” without explicitly stating they are ICE or seeking to make an arrest. This tactic aims to obtain consent to enter the home without the individual realizing they have the right to refuse entry.
    • Using phone ruses: ICE agents may also employ ruses over the phone to locate targets. These could include pretending to be local police asking questions, asking the person to meet them regarding a fake criminal case, claiming to have found a lost ID and needing to arrange a pickup, or contacting them about a court date or updated contact information. 
WHY DO SOME RUSE TACTICS VIOLATE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS?
Under the law, police officers, including ICE, can sometimes employ deceptive tactics in investigations, According to the Harvard Law Review, however, these ruses must generally be within legal boundaries and not violate constitutional rights. For instance, without a judicial warrant, ICE agents cannot force entry into a home and rely on trickery or deception to obtain consent, which raises questions about the voluntariness of that consent.
WHAT CAN PEOPLE IN IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES DO TO PREVENT UNLAWFUL ARREST, SEARCH, SEIZURE AND DEPORTATION?

In the meantime, people in immigrant communities can defend themselves by knowing their rights. Anybody confronted by law enforcement — whether undocumented or not — can and should do their best to verify the officers’ identity and purpose, document the encounter, and report what happened. Community members who know their rights can lawfully prevent ICE from entering their homes and protect themselves and their loved ones from such deceptive practices. More information in English and Spanish can be found here.

Please review my Search & Seizure Guide and contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Murders Are Down Nationwide

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Homicide & Manslaughter, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Studies, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,
Illustration of an arrow spiking up then down, made up of yellow tape with "Crime Scene Do Not Cross" written across.

Illustration by Ben Kothe / The Atlantic

NPR reports that In 2024, murders fell by at least 14% across the U.S. City officials often point to policing as a key reason, and that can play an important role, but crime analysts say there’s more to it.

THE DATA

These conclusions come according to analyses by the data firm AH Datalytics and the Council on Criminal Justice. Official data from the FBI goes only through 2023, but shows similar drops. Early analyses from AH Datalytics suggest the drop will be even bigger in 2025. Crime analysts say the reasons behind these drops are complex and broad.

WHAT CONTRIBUTED TO THE DECREASE IN MURDER & HOMICIDE?

Researchers who study crime caution that no one thing causes violence to rise or fall. But crime analysts have zeroed in on what they say is a primary driver of the rise and subsequent decline: the COVID-19 Pandemic.

All of a sudden, there were a lot of young people — who are more likely to commit crimes than older people — at home, with little to do. And a vital support system was ripped away: public services. Between March and May of 2020, the country’s local government workforce shrank by nearly 10%.

Five years after the start of the pandemic, local government employment is finally back at pre-pandemic levels. Municipalities are also bringing in more money, and their spending has rebounded as well. That means many services are coming back — and with them, places where young people can find support.

“We’re spending money on stuff, and when stuff is nicer, people have places to go. It creates jobs. It creates environments where people are hanging out. It’s not the broken-windows concept of ‘we need to arrest people for graffiti,’ but it’s more like the kind of idealized version of broken windows that, ‘if we make things nice and people are around it, it provides a means of interrupting cycles of violence.” ~Jeff Asher, co-founder of AH Datalytics

In Detroit, Police Chief Bettison credits some of the murder decline there to changes in policing techniques and to higher officer staffing levels. But he also sees things more holistically.

“It is not one thing that drives violence. And so we are always consistently looking for the root causes,” he says.

Two years ago, the city invested $10 million in six community organizations. Each group was assigned a section of the city. Their goal was to reduce violence in that area using what is known as community violence intervention.

Negus Vu is the executive director of one of those groups, the Detroit People’s Community, which is also known as The People’s Action. The essential element to the group’s work, Vu says, is building relationships with young people who may be at risk of committing violence.

“You have outreach workers who have lived, shared experiences that are the ones who establish these relationships. And because these relationships are genuine and sincere, they’re able to refer them to get wraparound services such as substance abuse, job referrals, therapy. If you meet people’s needs, they’re less likely to turn to violence.” ~Negus Vu, Executive Director of the Detroit People’s Community.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with Homicide or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Incarceration Affects Mortality

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Jail, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Prison, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Studies, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Incarcerated People Remain Vulnerable to the Worst Ravages of a Warming World | NOVA | PBS

Photo credit: Bob Jagendorf / Flickr (CC BY-NC 2.0)

The US has the highest incarceration rates in the developed world. A (rather grim) new study by JAMA Network Open shows that incarceration has long-term negative effects on health and mortality. People who were incarcerated in 2008 had a 39% higher risk of dying and more than three times the risk of dying from an overdose by 2019 than people who weren’t.

And the risk of incarceration doesn’t just affect the people inside. Researchers also found that county incarceration rates were associated with increased all-cause mortality risks for nonincarcerated residents.

THE STUDY’S DESIGN, SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study used data from the Mortality Disparities in American Communities (MDAC) study, linking over 3 million 2008 American Community Survey (ACS) respondents to National Death Index data from the respondents’ 2008 interview date through December 31, 2019, or their date of death, and county incarceration data from the Vera Institute of Justice. The sample included US adults 18 years or older, representing individuals in group quarters such as prisons and jails but excluding those in counties lacking jail incarceration rate data. Data were analyzed from July 5, 2023, to November 10, 2024.

RESULTS

The study includes a total of 3 255 000 individuals (51.3% female), of whom 45 000 (0.93%) were incarcerated at the time of the 2008 ACS administration. The mean (SD) county jail incarceration rate was 372 (358) per 100 000 people. During the study period, 431 000 individuals (11.6%) died from any cause, and 5500 (0.2%) died from overdoses. Incarcerated individuals had a higher risk of all-cause mortality (hazard rate [HR], 1.39 [95% CI, 1.33-1.45]) and an increased risk of overdose mortality (HR, 3.08 [95% CI, 2.70-3.52]) compared with nonincarcerated individuals. A 10% increase in county jail incarceration rates was associated with 4.6 (95% CI, 3.8-5.5) additional all-cause deaths per 100 000 people.

CONCLUSIONS & RELEVANCE

The results showed how urgently improved health care during and after incarceration is needed. Furthermore, JAMA Network specifically pointed to community-based primary care as a potential solution:

“Individuals who were incarcerated faced significantly higher risks of death, particularly from overdoses, and elevated county incarceration rates exacerbated individual-level mortality risks. These findings suggest the need for reforms in criminal justice and public health policies to address these elevated risks and their widespread implications.” ~JAMA Network

Being jailed and/or imprisoned negatively impacts one’s health and mortality. Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

“Intelligent Speed Assistance” Devices Gaining Popularity

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Legislation, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Reckless Driving, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Briefing: Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) - ETSC

Very interesting article in Popular Science discusses recent legislation giving judges the authority to mandate the installation of devices that physically prevent repeat offenders from exceeding posted speed limits. Earlier this month, the Washington State Senate overwhelmingly passed House Bill 1596 (40-8), known as the BEAM Act, which aims to reduce reckless speeding and enhance road safety across the state.  At least five other states, including Cohen’s home state of New York, are considering similar legislation.

Apparently, the political will for this technology exists. Across the country, statistics show that a small portion of drivers who consistently drive too fast—a group referred to by advocates as “super speeders”—are responsible for a sizable chunk of fatal traffic deaths.

There’s reason to believe the issue is getting worse, too. Research shows drivers across the country started speeding more during the earlier stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown. Jessica Cicchino, vice president of research at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, believes some drivers may be tempted to drive faster due to “empty roads” driving during lockdowns. But that habit seems to have lingered even when traffic increased. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) claims speeding-related fatalities in the US reached a 14-year high in 2021.

Supporters of anti-speed legislation see a parallel between the proposed court-mandated speed limiters and the more widely known ignition interlock devices (or “in-car breathalyzers”) used for people convicted of driving under the influence.

WHAT IS “INTELLIGENT SPEED ASSISTANCE?”

Devices broadly referred to as “Intelligent Speed Assistance” (ISA) systems, leverage advances in GPS and other technologies embedded in modern connected cars to apply a similar “in-car breathalyzers” concept to speeding. And while the movement against so-called “Super Speeders” is gaining momentum, some worry that mandatory ISA devices could introduce new, unintended safety risks. The legislation may also face an uphill battle in rural, lower-population states where driving—and driving fast—is deeply ingrained in daily life and culture.

Advocates say ISA devices, particularly those targeted toward alleged Reckless Driving, could make streets significantly safer for both motorists and pedestrians. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), more than 11,775 people died in speed-related crashes last year. Speeding, the agency says, was a “contributing factor” in 29 percent of all traffic fatalities.

HOW DOES INTELLIGENT SPEED ASSISTANCE WORK?

Devices designed to limit a vehicle’s top speed, sometimes referred to as governors or speed limiters, date back to the early-20th century. Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) systems differ in that they rely on a combination of the vehicle’s current speed and the posted speed limit. These devices determine the legal speed limit using GPS data synced with a pre-programmed digital map, or by employing the vehicle’s onboard cameras and LiDAR sensors to read speed limit signs in real time. Cameras and LiDAR are the same types of sensors used to help Waymo and other autonomous vehicles “see” the world around them.

Once an ISA system detects that a driver has exceeded the speed limit, it triggers various visual and audio cues, usually in the form of warning chimes and flashing dashboard lights. These systems are referred to as “passive” ISA. All new vehicles sold in the European Union, as of last year, must have passive ISA systems. The “active” ISA systems, which the Super Speeder legislation focuses on, go a step further by using tactile responses to push back on the accelerator or limit the engine’s power output, physically preventing the driver from exceeding a certain speed.

Judges or local governments can set thresholds for how far over the speed limit a driver can go before the system intervenes—typically around 5 mph above the posted limit. These devices are designed to detect changes in speed limits in advance, giving the driver time to slow down gradually. In theory, this should help avoid scenarios where a vehicle suddenly slams on the brakes upon entering an area with a lower speed limit.

DOES ISA TECHNOLOGY HAVE CRITICS?

Yes. Some opponents argue that the inability to temporarily exceed the speed limit could create dangers in certain scenarios, like when a driver is suddenly confronted with a tailgater. There are also emergency situations, like rushing to a hospital due to an injury or pregnancy, or quickly avoiding a potential collision, where it would seem reasonable to allow a driver to momentarily exceed the posted speed limit at their discretion.

Some legislation, like the one in Washington, attempts to side step this by including a big red button that drivers could press up to three times per month to override their mandatory ISA system. The button is configurable, and can be programmed to only allow a certain amount of uses over a certain amount of times.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with Reckless Driving or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

High Court Denies Defendant’s Request For Mental Health Sentencing Alternative

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Mental Health, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, No Contact Order, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Washington Court of Appeals, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Mental health disorder names - not criminally responsible

In State v. Colon, No. 59046-8-II (Apr. 29, 2025), the WA Court of Appeals held that sentencing courts may deny a defendant’s request for a Mental Health Sentencing Alternative (MHSA). Reasons for denial may include (1) no nexus between a defendant’s mental health diagnoses and the crime; (2) the victim opposes a MHSA; (3) the defendant has a lengthy criminal history and non-compliance with court orders with limited history of engagement in mental health treatment, and (4) continued treatment within prison is more suitable.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Colon was convicted of felony violation of a no-contact order by going to his ex-wife and children’s apartment. He requested sentencing under the MHSA. However, the trial court denied his request and sentenced Colon to 60 months of prison.

At a re-sentencing hearing, the court again denied Colon’s request for a MHSA  and found it inappropriate. The sentencing court concluded neither the community nor Colon would benefit from a MHSA for several reasons: there was no nexus between Colon’s mental health diagnoses and his conduct underlying his conviction; the victim’s opposition to a MHSA and her history with Colon; and Colon was a poor fit for a MHSA because of his criminal history, non-compliance with court orders, and limited history of engagement in mental health treatment.

Colon appealed, arguing that the sentencing court abused its discretion by denying his request for a MHSA on a non-statutory, impermissible basis.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

The Court of Appeals (COA) began by saying Courts may deviate from the standard prison sentences under specified circumstances, such as for a MHSA. Furthermore, granting an alternative sentence is entirely within the sentencing court’s discretion. However, the sentencing court must meaningfully consider the request for a discretionary sentence in accordance with the applicable law.

The COA stated a MHSA has four eligibility requirements:

  • The defendant is convicted of a felony that is not a serious violent offense or sex offense;
  • The defendant is diagnosed with a serious mental illness recognized by the diagnostic manual in use by mental health professionals at the time of sentencing;
  • The defendant and the community would benefit from supervision and treatment, as determined by the judge; and
  • The defendant is willing to participate in the sentencing alternative.

Here, Colon argued the sentencing court improperly held that a nexus must exist between his conduct and his mental health diagnosis. This “nexus,” he argued, is not one of the four eligibility requirements (elements) for a MHSA sentence. The COA felt differently.

“This is not an additional element, but simply one way to consider whether the community would benefit from treatment aimed at controlling symptoms arising from Colon’s mental health diagnoses that could lead to criminal conduct in the community,” said the COA. “Thus, the court did not abuse its discretion when it considered this factor in connection with whether a MHSA would benefit the community.”

Additionally, COA held that the sentencing court gave other reasons supporting its determination that a MHSA was inappropriate. These include the victim’s opinion, Colon’s criminal history, Colon’s noncompliance with community custody, and Colon’s  lack of participation in treatment and services. The COA reasoned these considerations speak to the court weighing Colon’s prospective treatment and how to protect the community.

“The court did not abuse its discretion in denying Colon’s request for a MHSA based on its consideration of a nexus between Colon’s mental health diagnoses and his conduct. Instead, the court considered the relevant statutory factors and made clear that its conclusion was based on the lack of benefit to both Colon and the community.” ~WA Court of Appeals

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

April is Distracted Driving Awareness Month

Uncategorized

3 Types Of Distracted Driving: Visual, Cognitive And Manual

Distracted driving is a deadly epidemic on our roads. Cell phone use — specifically, texting, talking, and social media use — has become the most common distraction. Other risky actions include adjusting the radio or GPS, applying makeup, eating and drinking. By driving distracted, you’re robbing yourself of seconds that you may need to avoid a close call or deadly crash.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), distracted driving killed 3,275 people in 2023. from April 10 through 14, you may see increased law enforcement on the roadways. This is part of the national paid media campaign Put the Phone Away or Pay. This campaign reminds drivers of the deadly dangers and the legal consequences – including fines – of texting behind the wheel.

THREE TYPES OF DISTRACTED DRIVING

The AAA-Foundation for Traffic Safety (AAA-FTS) has identified the 3 three types of distracted driving as:

  • Visual Distracted Driving – Taking eyes off the road
  • Cognitive Distracted Driving – Mental distractions that take the driver’s mind off the task of driving
  • Manual Distracted Driving – Taking your hands off the wheel

DISTRACTED DRIVING CAN BE CRIMINALLY CHARGED AS RECKLESS DRIVING

In Washington State, “Dangerously Distracted Driving” is a traffic infraction.  However, this low-level traffic infraction can be elevated to the criminal offense of  Reckless Driving if the circumstances prevail. A person is guilty of Reckless Driving if they exhibit a willful and wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property. Washington law identifies specific actions considered prima facie evidence of Reckless Driving. These include:

  1. Embracing another while driving: As per RCW 46.61.665, it is unlawful to operate a motor vehicle while embracing another person, as it prevents the free and unhampered operation of the car.
  2. Racing: Under RCW 46.61.530, any person or persons racing any motor vehicle on any public highway of this state is guilty of reckless driving, regardless of whether such speed is in excess of the maximum speed prescribed by law.
  3. Excess Speed: Excess speed can serve as prima facie evidence of reckless driving under RCW 46.61.465. However, evidence of excess speed alone is insufficient to uphold a conviction for reckless driving.

Reckless Driving charges can result in very serious consequences for all drivers, especially Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) holders and others who drive for work. Reckless Driving is a gross misdemeanor that can result in the following penalties & consequences:

  • Jail time of up to 364 days
  • $5,000.00 fine
  • Probation
  • Mandatory 30-day driver’s license suspension
  • SR-22 high risk auto insurance for 36 months
  • Ignition Interlock requirement
  • Increased auto insurance premiums
  • Loss of employment (especially for CDL holders)

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with Reckless Driving or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Vehicular Homicide Conviction Prohibits Defendants From Owning or Possessing Firearms

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Constitutional Rights, felony, Firearm, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Washington Court of Appeals, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , ,

Judge Rules Bruen Doesn't Protect Felons' 2A Rights - Firearms News

(rawf8 / Shutterstock photo)

In State v. Hamilton, No. 85055-5-I (March 17, 2025), the WA Court of Appeals decided that disarming those convicted of Vehicular Homicide  is consistent with the United States’ historic tradition of firearms regulation.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Mr. Hamilton was convicted of Vehicular Homicide after a jury trial. Due to his felony conviction, the court notified Hamilton that he could no longer possess firearms. He was ordered to immediately surrender his concealed pistol license and any firearms in his possession. The court also imposed conditions forbidding him from owning, using, or possessing a firearm or ammunition, consistent with the prohibition set out under statute.

On appeal, Hamilton argued that Washington’s statutes restricting his firearms post-conviction violate the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

The Court of Appeals (COA) discussed numerous U.S. Supreme Court decisions addressing Second Amendment. These decision include New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, and United States v. Rahimi. In applying stare decisis, the COA ultimately held that the overwhelming majority of courts addressing statutes that ban convicted felons from possessing firearms have rejected the contention that such laws are now unconstitutional. Next, the COA addressed Hamilton challenging the as-applied constitutionality of several Washington statutes that work in conjunction to strip a person’s right to bear arms upon conviction for a felony.

” . . . We conclude that disarming those with felony convictions is demonstrably consistent with America’s historic tradition of firearms regulation. Common law has a long history of disarming individuals, or categories of individuals, who were viewed as a danger to public order . . . The historical justification for felon bans reveals one controlling principal that applies to each historical period: violent or otherwise dangerous persons could be disarmed . . .”

“Groups of people who were categorized as presenting a danger to the public order during that era of our nation’s history included American Indians, Catholics, Quakers, slaves, and freed Black people. Such restrictions are repugnant and would fail modern constitutional scrutiny, but they nevertheless demonstrate historical precedent for restricting the firearms rights of persons perceived to be dangerous.” ~WA Court of Appeals

Finally, the COA addressed Hamilton’s argument that his felony conviction involved a “tragic accident” rather than the actual use of a firearm or political activity. The COA reasoined that Hamilton nevertheless committed a felony offense that resulted in the death of another person. As a result, reasoned the COA, his behavior places him squarely in the category of persons deemed dangerous to the public order for the purpose of historical firearms regulation.

With that, the Court of Appeals affirmed Hamilton’s criminal conviction.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Firearm Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Otherwise Inadmissible Evidence May Be Admitted Under the Independent Source Doctrine

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Search Warrant, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Chapter 9 The Exclusionary Rule. - ppt video online download

In State v. Tyson, the WA Court of Appeals held the Independent Source Doctrine allows admission of digital evidence seized from a cell phone pursuant to a valid warrant regardless of whether the officer’s initial, warrantless seizure of the physical phone was authorized.

The Independent Source Doctrine

The Independent Source doctrine provides that evidence from an illegal search may be admitted when it can be established that the evidence would have been eventually legally obtained from an independent source. For example, if police obtain evidence during an unlawful search but later obtain the same evidence through a valid search warrant, the evidence can be used in court. 

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Tyson was charged with numerous sex offenses. He moved to suppress all evidence obtained from the search of his cell phone by police. He later expanded his motion to include suppression of all evidence obtained as a result of the search warrants in this case.

With regard to the cell phone, Tyson argued that the deputy’s seizure of the phone pending the issuance of a warrant to search it was unlawful, and that any evidence obtained during the subsequent search of the phone should be suppressed. With respect to the search warrants, Tyson argued that the first warrant was unlawful because it lacked sufficient particularity. Tyson further argued that the evidence obtained as a result of the subsequent warrants should be suppressed as “fruit of the poisonous tree” of the unlawful first warrant.

Following a pre-trial hearing, the trial court denied both of Tyson’s motions to suppress. The trial court ruled that the warrantless seizure of the cell phone was authorized by the exigent circumstances exception, but not by the plain view exception. The trial court further ruled that the warrants were supported by probable cause and sufficiently particular.

The case proceeded to a bench trial. The judge found Tyson guilty on charges.

On appeal, Tyson argued that the trial court erred when it denied his motions to suppress evidence. First, Tyson argued that the warrantless seizure of his cell phone was unconstitutional because no exception to the warrant requirement applies. Next, Tyson argued that the trial court erred by admitting evidence obtained pursuant to the warrants to search Tyson’s cell phone, laptop, and hard drive. Tyson argues that the warrants were unconstitutional because they were not supported by probable cause under the Aguilar/Spinelli test, and the allegations in the warrant were not sufficiently particularized.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

In short, the WA Court of Appeals held that regardless of whether the warrantless seizure of Tyson’s cell phone was authorized, evidence obtained from the cell phone is admissible under the independent source doctrine because it was seized pursuant to a valid warrant.

“As we conclude above, the photos and evidence on the cell phone were seized pursuant to valid search warrants. Because there had been no search of the phone prior to the warrant application, no information from the phone was used in any of the search warrant affidavits. Therefore, neither the deputy’s decision to seek the warrants nor magistrate’s decision to issue the warrants were influenced by the warrantless seizure of the cell phone. The trial court did not err in denying Tyson’s motion to suppress.” ~WA Court of Appeals

With that, the Court of Appeals denied Tyson’s appeal and upheld Tyson’s convictions.

Please review my Search & Seizure Legal Guide and contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a similar crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.